[big fish] 3月9日 ARGUMENT161 by wowoyuweiwei

wowoyuweiweiUID: 2754055

In this argument, the author demionstrated two survey. In the first one, it indicated most people like reading literary classics. However, the second follow-up one, suggested the most popular kind of book checked out was  mystery novel. From these, the writer announced that respondents in the first study did not tell the truth. At the first glance, it seemed to be well-reasoned, but when I considered it more, I figured out it was not such logical.
First of all, the writer did not tell us who took the first survey. As we know, people in different ages have different habits in reading. If the respondents were consisted by older ones, the result may probably be the right answer. Because the way they get books is buying not checking them out from library.
Secondly, we did not know when the second survey conducted. In the passage, the writer just told us the next one is follow-up, mentioning nothing about the exact time between these two survey. If it was done almost 5 years later, the resisdents' appetite of reading could change a lot. The major readers are about 20 years old and they are more intereste in mystery causede by curiosty. The older persons who prefered classic books can not read any more for their poor eyesights.
Thirdly, we should not conclude that the citizens read mystery novels rather than classic literaries justified by the second survey. How could we tell whether the most popular books in library is their real appetite? There are different ways to get books, such as buying and lending from friends. And, coincidently, the classical ones can not be checked out and the mystery novels can only be gotten in this way. Therefore, the evidence can not support writer's opinion.
To sum it up, if the writer wants to bolster his perspective well, there should be  evidence to tell readers that who are the respondents of the two surveies. And then, he or she should also show us the exact time between them avoiding the reason shown in the third paragraph. At last, it is best to chech out that the number of books checked out can effectively show the most readers interests. Only in this way, the perspective in the argument could be believed.

cloudwind-greUID: 2462220

1# wowoyuweiwei

In this argument, the author demionstrated (不知道前面用过去时态可不可以,我看ETS的范文多用现在时) two survey. In the first one, it indicated most people like reading literary classics. However, the second follow-up one, suggested the most popular kind of book checked out was  mystery novel. From these, the writer announced that respondents in the first study did not tell the truth. At the first glance, it seemed to be well-reasoned, but when I considered it more, I figured out it was not such logical. 语言很平实,但很通顺,感觉很流畅.过渡词也用得不错.
First of all, the writer did not tell us who took the first survey. As we know, people in different ages have different habits in reading. If the respondents were consisted by older ones, the result may probably be the right answer. Because the way they get books is buying not checking them out from library. 老人家不一定就会买吧,建议改成if the respondents were those who like to buy books instead of  checking......之类的.
Secondly, we did not know when the second survey conducted. In the passage, the writer just told us the next one is follow-up, mentioning nothing about the exact time between these two survey. If it was done almost 5 years later, the resisdents' appetite of reading could change a lot. ( 从这里开始下面两句话好像和上面没什么联系哦,这段说的是两个测试的时间间隙,下面两句话说的是不同的人)The major readers are about 20 years old and they are more intereste in mystery causede by curiosty. The older persons who prefered classic books can not read any more for their poor eyesights.
Thirdly, we should not conclude that the citizens read mystery novels rather than classic literaries justified by the second survey. How could we tell whether the most popular books in library is their real appetite? There are different ways to get books, such as buying and lending from friends. And, coincidently, the classical ones can not be checked out and the mystery novels can only be gotten in this way. Therefore, the evidence can not support (加个the) writer's opinion.
To sum it up, if the writer wants to bolster his perspective well, there should be  evidence to tell readers that who are the respondents of the two surveies. And then, he or she should also show us the exact time between them avoiding the reason shown in the third paragraph. At last, it is best to chech out that the number of books checked out can effectively show the most readers interests. Only in this way, the perspective in the argument could be believed.

建议每段间空出一行.美观点
语言还要加强点.